Messages

556

Lenses / Re: Bokeh confusion.

« on: December 27, 2012, 09:06:36 AM »

The bath tub shot presents a number of interesting problems to solve.

Some have been already suggested. I also see top corner distortion which adds to the bokeh issue. The field or farm which you want to highlight itself is not a uniform lawn of green or brown...rather it is mottled brown and green and busy...a tough subject in its own right.

If you we're reshooting (thought experiment here) then a wide angle shot  that is lower to the ground closer to the girl can be considered to emphasize the vastness of the farm. DOF would cover a wider range with a wide angle and fall off would be gradual.

But what can be done with the shot you already have... The girl in the bathtub is now centered... Crop the last fifth of the empty field to the right ...so she falls in the third herself...will fulfill the thirds rule and be more edgy.

Alternatively, you can crop long horizontally in a banner style ... Removing the top DOF fall off region... This will emphasize the land stretching on either side and remove the bokeh "confusion" in the background you refer to. I am sure there are a lot of other creative ways of getting the shot to work the way it is shot. Cheers.

557

Lenses / Re: Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]

« on: December 27, 2012, 08:30:16 AM »

Need some advice.  I just bought the 16-35.  Should I return it and wait for reviews of 14-24?

Which version? 16-35 ii?? I'd hang on to that for now, you could always sell it if and when the 14-24 surfaces.

Yes, it's the 16-35 ii.  That's the direction I was leaning towards.  Must have been experiencing some buyers remorse.  I just received this lens and then saw rumors on the 14-24.  Thanks.

They are/will be different beasts... For which reason the 14-24 if and when it materializes will not be a replacement for the 16-35II ...canon will continue to produce 16-35II and continue to charge ~$1399+.

 Personally I find the 16-35II a bit more versatile...might switch if the 14-24 is insanely sharper (not marginally).

I also prefer to use and enjoy things I have in real world now and not wait for the next best thing coming out perpetually in the next few months. That's just me

558

Lenses / Re: Any plan for 50mm pancake?

« on: December 26, 2012, 10:13:54 PM »

40mm is not a standard. Any plan for 50mm?

I doubt it...Canon would have at least considered it before the 40mm design and marketing plan... "So we already have three versions of the 50mm...we are probably gonna release an IS version of 50mm sometime soon... why not do something not already on the cluttered lineup and closer to the real normal?" And bingo, ya have a 40mm pancake.

559

Lenses / Re: attaching lens hoods

« on: December 26, 2012, 09:40:34 PM »

The alternate orientations that you can put the hood on when you do not align the spots also generate the same final symetry of the hood on the lens (even when using asymetric hoods like this petal one for the UWA zoom). This is the way I found my lens on the body when I read this post. So apprently I wasn't paying attention to Canon's instructions. 

So just put the hood on anywhich way that it will go smoothly onto the threads.  I personally never cared if the writing was on top or bottom. 

You  must be one of those anarchists I hear about!!

If canon weren't busy making 20 different versions of the 24-70mm to fleece customers, they'd have put a hit on me for nonconformity like that.   

560

Lenses / Re: attaching lens hoods

« on: December 26, 2012, 08:40:26 PM »

The alternate orientations that you can put the hood on when you do not align the spots also generate the same final symetry of the hood on the lens (even when using asymetric hoods like this petal one for the UWA zoom). This is the way I found my lens on the body when I read this post. So apprently I wasn't paying attention to Canon's instructions. 

So just put the hood on anywhich way that it will go smoothly onto the threads.  I personally never cared if the writing was on top or bottom. 

561

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma 35 f/1.4 DG HSM First Impressions

« on: December 25, 2012, 01:40:40 AM »

Here is CR.  I believe most people here are Canon fans, not Sigma fans.  You see many people post like "No red ring on it", "I buy only Canon", or even "I don't care how the reviews are, it's not Canon".
I assume you know how to use google search.  Please search Sigma 35mm F/1.4 review, and tell me how many reviews say Sigma/Canon better.  If you do believe most of the reviews, that's fine.  However, I believe there must a reason most reviews give Sigma the crown.  Don't even forget the price between Canon and Sigma is very different.

Actually this does not address issues raised in my post which you are not quoting...as to your reasoning "that lots of people say this is so" doesn't convince me any... rather some "group-think" is obvious and "me-too" blogs and reviews that follow the original lensrental format or even directly reference it...are not exactly "unbaised" nor always competent.

Lensrental's own blog, it must be said, is rather measured pointing out the bokeh could be a weak spot. I agree there are a couple more out there which I would believe but they are all careful to not over emphasize either the bokeh or the autofocus issues that may well emerge and rather stick to sharpness and the clear price advantage.

I had no beef about the better sharpness, but my posts (scroll back a few not just the last one) raises at least three seperate issues which none of the "Ra Ra Ra!!! reviews" address...certainly with no careful analysis or openly available data.

Only exception is lensrental blog which in fact reinforces the concern about the bokeh with graphs to boot!

I only quoted the part I disagree with you.  I won't waste my time to response the part I agree or cannot give a clear answer.
By the way, do you really try to do google search about the Sigma 35mm F/1.4?  Not all websites follow lensrental.com.  Many websites report the bokeh and autofocus of the new Sigma 35mm F/1.4 is amazing.  You can have your own opinion for the Sigma 35mm F/1.4.  However, I am just telling you many(or I should say most) webistes talking about the Sigma 35mm F/1.4 believe this is the new king of the 35mm prime.

Again, except lensrentals.com, I see no hard data... Just words. my point was not to put down sigma but to raise fair issues... Sorry if I am not so easily obligated to jump on the sigma bandwagon.

In fact, at least couple of sites clearly indicate the bokeh is suboptimal including lensrental blog which was gleefully cited to support sigma's ascendancy, but conveniently ignored when it suggested shortcomings.

My own view upon viewing the gallery of pics on lensrental, the Korean site, and Flickr, is that the the sigma bokeh looks "nervous". It is not pleasing to the eye. I also can't say I like the sigma pallet of colors. Some of these issues have cropped up in comments here repeatedly and reviews as well but we all know supporters ignore anything contrary and selectively cite the possitive aspects.

Your reply again provides platitudes ... No hard evidence... The only graphs or comparisons exist in the lensrental followup blog on 35 f2.

I wish that sigma has turned the corner...at the very least sigma may have forced canon to move up its own 35mm 1.4 release... But I won't be joining the sigma choir anytime soon without more comparisons from reputable sources... Comparisons, data, graphs...  Not words.

562

Lenses / Re: Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]

« on: December 24, 2012, 07:39:55 PM »

Canon is doing the classic, omg they have a great lens, before they snatch our potential 35 up-graders we better release ours. AKA Sigma.

And on a completely unrelated note...the ones who took the bait early and raved on at infinitum about the sigma have gone ominously quiet in this thread.

P.S Now, be gentle with me...It is Christmas. 

563

Lenses / Re: Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]

« on: December 24, 2012, 06:29:56 PM »

Do you think the 12-24 might be a good bet for crop sensors?  My "normal" lens is a Sigma 30 1.4 and I'm considering the new Tokina 11-16, but would gladly wait to see what the 12-24 is all about.

 

If you mean 14-24 then I would say the two current UWA to WA zooms 17-40L and 16-35L II are both already great zooms on your crop body covering wide to normal+  range (~27-64mm and ~26-56mm, respectively). As the crop captures just the center of the image plane you will not even see the corner issues in your body. Also, barrel distortion when it exists will be less noticeable as you will be capturing the sweet spot.

But you can always wait and pay more.

564

Lenses / Re: Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]

« on: December 24, 2012, 06:17:04 PM »

I will be keeping my 16-35 II unless the new zoom proves to be exceptionally sharp overall and noticably better in the corners (I will leave expecting pin sharp corners in a 14mm UWA with usually curved image planes to dreamers, I will be happy with moderate improvement). Though not central, the details of the mechanics, weight etc will also have some sway.

The 16-35 II is compact and is also little more versatile due to its focal length range...so no, I won't be jumping ship on a whim.

565

Lenses / Re: 135 mm IS anywhere?

« on: December 24, 2012, 02:07:20 PM »

Sorry to be the Grinch, but no chance of that anytime soon or even midterm.

Because in terms of satisfaction this lens sits at the tippy-top even in its current form. And Canon has a long long list of must-do things before they start to tinker with things that are highly regarded for both quality and value for the price.

As for IS, as I said earlier in a 135L thread, "Why paint the peacock?"

Merry Christmas!

566

Lenses / Re: Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]

« on: December 23, 2012, 07:49:38 PM »

anyone has a rough idea of the price for the 35L II? im seeing a price tag of roughly $2,000.00 correct me if im wrong.

Probably $1500 or so... If they go with $2000 that would cut the possible buyers down significantly....this is a general wide angle lens... Lots of people could want it...but only if priced properly...go a bit too high it becomes a specialty type pricing (like TS E, or ultra wide prime at 2k as in 14mm). No they will have to come somewhere in the 1500 to 1600 range...it will quickly slide down to the current L prime average of ~1400 after release and initial rush is gone. Not sustainable for a 35mm otherwise.

567

Lenses / Re: Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]

« on: December 23, 2012, 06:11:14 PM »

Back to topic: anyone thinks this might be a 1.2? Although Canon can definitely just make ample optic and build improvements to justify a mark II, a 35 1.2 would be nice Especially since I am still on crop for at least a while...

No...The patent was posted here a bit earlier... Even if it is something very different from that it will most likely remain  f1.4. Wide angle lens designs present unique set of problems to overcome and I don't think canon will complicate things.... They probably just want to update an aging lens with tweaks and in the process counter Sigma quickly... Introducing new variables, and further increasing what is likely to be a high price already for 1.4 is not something canon will want to try now.

568

Lenses / Re: Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]

« on: December 23, 2012, 05:02:37 PM »

The TS 17 was so soft I had to sell it, the af didn't work on three copies !! Useless...

Er... Sorry..TS E 17 is a manual lens ...trying to auto focus it is like trying to milk a bull?

569

Lenses / Re: Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]

« on: December 23, 2012, 04:43:44 PM »

ef 14/2.8LII here we come, cuz teh 12-24 will be $3000+.  I just need the validation.

I was thinking more like $2400 to 2500? Optimistic ? 

570

Lenses / Re: Announcement on January 8, 2013? New Lenses [CR1]

« on: December 23, 2012, 01:13:45 PM »

Not buying this rumor -- especially for the 35. A new flagship L with less technology than its non-L counterpart?

The new 35L certainly will have IS. 

- A

Zero chance of an IS ... Shouldn't expect IS for any of their L primes until you reach the tele range. 24L II, 50L, 85L II should tell you the story.